[Bug 207782] Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207782





------- Additional Comments From mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2006-10-08 13:58 EST -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> Hi Mamoru, thanks for the feedback.  I'll fix the license inclusion, the 
> redundant BRs and the time-stamp issue and will post another SRPM.
> 
> So how did you get rpmlint to produce all the undefined-non-weak-symbol
> warnings?  

Try: "rpmlint itpp (with itpp installed)". This rpmlint can be gained
only when used for installed rpms. See:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-September/msg00825.html

Well, for now these warning can be ignored because I tried to link
against libitpp.so and it succeeded so this is NOT a blocker.

[tasaka1 at localhost PROGRAM]$ cat itpp-check.cpp 
int main(){
  return 0;
}
[tasaka1 at localhost PROGRAM]$ g++ -Wall -O2 -o itpp-check itpp-check.cpp
`itpp-config --libs` -L/usr/lib/atlas

However, I recommend that you report this to upstream.
Anyway, fix the dependency for -devel package.

> When I run rpmlint against all of the rpms generated here on 
> my system, I only get these two lines:
> 
>   W: itpp-devel no-documentation
>   E: itpp-debuginfo script-without-shebang 
>      /usr/src/debug/itpp-3.10.5/itpp/base/itpp_version.h
> 
> which, in my opinion, are both safe to ignore.

The first one (no-documentation issue) can be ignored, I think too.
The latter one is because:
-rwxr-xr-x    1 root    root  1542 Jul 12 18:33
/usr/src/debug/itpp-3.10.5/itpp/base/itpp_version.h
The permission should be 0644, not 0755.



-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.